This is what happens when people try to replace legitimate science with their religious and superstitious beliefs. And in a predominantly Catholic nation, such as the Philippines. The following dilemma is not too hard to believe. Especially when you’re dealing with a country that blindly permits their Church(s) to maintain a serious level of control. Not only over the people themselves. But even the political figures governing them.
Ironically, we’ve seen this same phenomenon (and claim) here, in the Philippines not too long ago, when a couple of folks criticized the validity of the theory of evolution (specifically, the concept of macro evolution) but failed to present viable arguments to support their argument, relying instead on anecdotes from figures of authority, red herrings, and special pleading to skirt their way around the plethora of rebuttals that came their way.
Seeing that their rebuttals are the same as that of known creationist personalities, I guess it would be safe to conclude that they embrace the concept of Creationism as per their chosen interpretation of Scripture. I’d have to ask these folks, however:
“If you think the Theory of Evolution is false and/or cannot be proven, what is the basis of your rejection?”
It’s worth noting (for those who do not know) that there are different overlapping “kinds” of creationists; from Young Earth Creationists who believe that the Earth was created in 144 literal hours and that Scripture is more reliable than Science, to Evolutionary Creationists, who believe in the authority of their scriptures yet do not eschew modern scientific discoveries in shaping how they view and understand the world. There are also the Progressive Creationists, who agree that the Earth is as old as mainstream science says it is, though this knowledge still agrees with Scripture, as well as the Intelligent Design advocates, that claim that their ideas are a viable alternative to the evolutionary theory, in that certain features of the natural world can only be explained by an intelligent cause.
Which begs the question: “Which came first. The chicken, or the egg?”